Chrysler Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsAug 27, 1959

124 N.L.R.B. 792 (N.L.R.B. 1959)

792 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Chrysler Corporation (St. Louis Assembly Plant ), Petitioner and International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW), AFL- CIO 'and Local 2, International Union of Operating .Engineers, AFL-CIO.2 Cases Nos. 14-Zell-191, R-1407, and R-2209. Au- gust 27, 1959 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held in the above-entitled proceeding before Daniel F: Gruender, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rul- ings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed:- Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the Board has.delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Rodgers, Bean, and Fanning]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees of the Employer. 3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act for the following reasons. This case arose because of a claim of the Operating Engineers to representation of four steam engineers at the Employer-Petitioner's St. Louis Assembly Plant located near Valley Park, Missouri.3 To have the validity of this claim determined by the Board, the Employer filed the instant petition for a unit of all hourly rated production and maintenance employees at that plant, including steam engineers in the powerhouse. The Employer agrees, however, with the con- tention of the UAW that a current multiplant contract between the UAW and the Employer, based on prior Board certificates, covers the employees in the requested unit and constitutes a bar to this proceeding. The Employer contends that if an election is ordered, it should be limited to the four steam engineers. The Operating Engineers contends that the four steam engineers are supervisors within the meaning of the Act. They agree with the Employer that an election, if ordered, should only be held in an appropriate unit consisting of the four steam engineers. 1 Herein called UAW. 2 Herein called Operating Engineers. 3In Case No. 14-RC-3558 the Operating Engineers had petitioned for a unit of the steam engineers . This petition was withdrawn after the prehearing conference. Sub- sequently thereto, however , the Operating Engineers renewed their claim. 124 NLRB No. 95. CHRYSLER CORPORATION (ST. LOUIS ASSEMBLY PLANT) 793 As the Operating Engineers does not seek recognition as bargaining representative for the unit described in the petition, the petition is subject to dismissal on that ground 4 The UAW's contract-bar con- tention, however, based on prior Board certificates, carries that Union's claim to represent the employees herein in a unit broader in scope and encompassing the unit sought by the Employer.5 In view thereof, we shall treat the instant petition as a motion for clarification. The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of automobiles and trucks in 40 plants throughout the United States. Since 1937, it has maintained successive collective-bargaining agreements with the UAW covering the employees in various plants pursuant to Board certifica- tions. One of these plants is an assembly plant located in Evansville, Indiana, for which the UAW was certified in 1941.8 In 1953 the Em- ployer purchased the assets of Briggs Manufacturing Company which, inter alia, operated a body plant in Evansville, Indiana, whose em- ployees were also represented by the UAW, the certified bargaining representative,' under successive collective-bargaining agreements since 1938. The Employer, in 1953, assumed the then current contract of Briggs. In September 1955, the Employer entered into separate but identical contracts with the UAW for the employees of both Evansville plants. On October 1, 1958, the Employer and the UAW executed a single national agreement which includes the production and maintenance employees of both Evansville plants, including steam engineers. This contract is effective until August 31, 1961. In the summer of 1958 the Employer began the construction of the St. Louis Assembly Plant herein involved for the purpose of trans-; ferring or relocating the operations of the two Evansville plants into a modern installation. At the time of the hearing the plant was nearing completion and employed about 50 employees in 7 classifica= tions. By September 1959 it is scheduled to employ about 1,200 em- ployees. By December 1959 it will be. brought up to its proposed full strength of 3,800 employees in about 60 classifications. The Employer has conducted a canvass among the 5,200 employees presently em= ployed at Evansville as to their desires for transfer to the St. Louis Assembly Plant. Of these, 4,700 have indicated such desire and the Employer has declared its willingness to staff its St. Louis Assembly Plant with transferees from Evansville. However, because of the licensing. requirements of the City of St. Louis steam engineers had to be recruited locally and the four steam engineers herein involved.,are 4 Win. Wolf Bakery, Inc., 97 NLRB 122. 5 Triangle Publications , Inc. (Radio and Television Broadcasting Stations WFIL, WFIL-FM; an.d'WFIL-TV), 115 NLRB 941, at 942. . "Certificate, dated February 28, 1941, Chrysler Corporation,. 29 NLRB,. 1164, . ease No. R-2209. T Certificate dated. November ;16, i939,; Briggs Manufacturing 'Company , 17..NLRB 14:9, Case No. R-1407. 794 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD presently, and probably will be, in the future, the only employees not transferred from Evansville. On these facts and the record as a whole we fuid that the St. Louis Assembly Plant is not a new operation but represents the consolida- tion and relocation of the operations of the two Evansville plants.' The employees of the St. Louis Assembly Plant are therefore part of the nationwide production and maintenance unit, including steam engineers , established by the collective bargaining of the Employer and the UAW. The requested production and maintenance unit limited to the employees of the St. Louis Assembly Plant is inap- propriate. Accordingly, we shall amend the UAW's certificates in Cases Nos. R-1407 and R-2209 in accordance with these findings. We further find that the 1958 collective-bargaining agreement is a bar to this proceeding, and we shall therefore dismiss the petition.9 [The Board amended the certifications of representatives issued in Cases Nos. R-1407 and R-2209 to include in the unit description thereof the production and maintenance unit employees including steam engineers of the Employer's St. Louis Assembly Plant, Valley Park, Missouri.] [The Board dismissed the petition in Case No. 14-RM-194.] $ General Motors Corporation , Cadillac Motor Car Division, 120 NLRB 1215, at 1221; The Mennen Company, 105 NLRB 677; Ford Motor Company, 92 NLRB 188. O As the parties are primarily concerned with the status of the four steam engineers, and as the latter ' s duties and functions have been fully litigated , we shall determine their alleged supervisory status. The record shows that the steam engineers work under the supervision of the chief engineer who, in addition to supervising the regular day shift, spends some time on the other two shifts and is available for call and advice at all hours. The engineers work alongside one boiler operator and one fireman on each shift whom they assist and occasionally direct in the maintenance and repair of powerhouse ma- chinery. This direction is of a routine character and in the nature of the guidance given by a skilled craftsman to less experienced personnel . The steam engineers have no authority to hire, discharge , assign, reward , discipline , transfer , or promote any employee, nor can they effectively recommend such action, we find that they are not supervisors within the meaning of the Act, but that they are employees included in the multiplant bargaining unit covered by the national contract between the Employer and the UAW. Craft severance of the steam engineers of that plant is also inappropriate , as bargaining for steam engineers was substantially on a nationwide basis and craft severance must be coextensive with the existing bargaining unit . Compare United States Gypsum Company, 119 NLRB 1415, at 1418. Local Union No. 1842, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO [Avco Manufacturing Corporation, Crosley Division] and Gene J. Klopp. Case No. 9-CB-362. August 31, 1959 DECISION AND ORDER On January 26, 1959, Trial Examiner John H. Eadie issued his Intermediate , Report in the above -entitled proceeding , finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in' certain :unfair 124 NLRB No. 86.